The right's dangerous legal argument
Find a Conversation
The right's dangerous legal argument
| Thu, 03-05-2009 - 9:46pm |
Appearing for the supporters of Prop 8, Kenneth Starr, the former Whitewater prosecutor, said the people hold the right to modify the state constitution by adding or subtracting protections for civil rights.
Court appears ready to uphold Prop. 8
Full length fiction: worlds undone
"You have no power over my body..." ~ Anne Hutchinson
"You think you know, sir!" ~ Cornflake Girl ~ Tori Amos.

Pages
I clarified
~you have the same exact right as I do.
~What a cop out.
~If you can truly understand the power of love between two human beings, then you know that such claims are just plain dismissive and hurtful, and I suspect you would not take kindly to having *your* relationship viewed in such a superficial and cavalier manner.~
I think there's maybe just
>>> That's a pretty exclusive bunch you've got there and it would also exclude just about every male, too. I believe there have been some women kickers and a few hockey players who have cracked the semi-pro ranks. Should they be excluded by gender if they are good enough?
Yes...and I don't care how good Steve looks in a dress, he shouldn't be allowed to join the Girl Scouts.
>>> Is there a "politically correct" contingent asking for equal opportunity for women, other than by ability, in men's pro sports?
There's a double edge sword here...opportunities for women, and what's best for her children and society.
>>>>> I was waiting for the livestock argument to be thrown in there for a minute - good response to the narrow mindedness.
I very much appreciate laura801's
You've lost me here. what do opportunities for women have to do with what's best for children and society?
It is not "denying" same sex couples the right of marriage, it is a question of what benefit is it to the state to create a right for same sex couples to marry.
Again, I have no issue of the state chooses, through the legislative process to create that right.
The previous poster didn't make any distinction for what is "morally or ethically appropriate", so I saw no reason to be so bound in my response.
By the same token, there are many out there who do not consider same-sex marriage to be morally or ethically appropriate - ask a muslim, or a fundimentalist christian, or an orthodox jew if same sex relations, let alone same sex marriage, are morally or ethically appropriate.
As for the notion of a "civic right", I consider that an oxymoron.
It is not "denying" same sex couples the right of marriage, it is a question of what benefit is it to the state to create a right for same sex couples to marry.
Again, I have no issue of the state chooses, through the legislative process to create that right.
Full length fiction: worlds undone
"You have no power over my body..." ~ Anne Hutchinson
Pages